Eros Is Casting
The blade of this day did not stay where it always had been but went to a new place. The all-night conversation surrounding Adolf Brand's community lineage did not stop at the history of the homosexual liberation movement but descended into a deeper stratum: desire and domination. What I gained at the end of that descent was a single sentence. In the Greek model of pederasty, love was not dialogue but casting. The unfinished boy, because he does not speak, becomes instead the raw material into which the adult's words are injected and shaped into the adult's form, while the comrade who speaks is already waste after production. Once I began to read desire in the language of domination, the answer to the opposite side of this model stood on its own. The age myth itself—that youth is enough—is a symptom, and every consent an adult proposes to a boy is valid only within the frame the adult has laid in advance. The ideal-type statement that the true is not coercion purifies concrete coercion and always protects the actual abuser. Consent is structurally impossible where equality is absent—cutting out this principle was the first half of the night.
The second half began by moving that principle to the place of women. The question came about the missing half in the male-centered narrative that tried to explain everything with a single boy: the women who, while men shared brotherhood in associations and on battlefields, were forcibly organized into the substructure of care. The desire of the oppressed does not disappear but is refracted into safe channels. That was BL, and that was the culture of vicarious satisfaction. The reason women depicted love between men was that only by borrowing the safe screen of the male body could they display desire without making their own bodies sexual objects. Furthermore, in the joke that Greek food is delicious and German food is not, I drew out the class history of domestic labor and cooking culture. The Mediterranean myth is an evaluation invented by American nutrition science and tourist capital, and the standard of taste is always set in the conqueror's kitchen. All these—the power asymmetry of pederasty, the refraction of female desire, the class history of taste—are seemingly entirely different things, but they meet in one place. My lifelong training, reading the structure of domination behind the surface abstraction, this time walked for the first time into the realms of sex, desire, and labor.
Another scene from the same day, in the daytime, showed how this blade wears down not in writing but in the language of the masses. While reviewing a post about troop dispatch with comrades, I pulled out the single word 'entirely.' Before a public that knows the world's fifth-largest economy and the technological prowess of Samsung, SK, and Hyundai, saying that sovereignty was handed over 'entirely' reads as biased language, making readers close the book at the first chapter. I established that the word should not mean the absence of technological capability but that the command of force is bound externally. What the public sees is the fact that Samsung makes semiconductors; what it does not see is the connection that the equipment and materials are in the grip of ASML and Japan. And at the end of the same conversation, I honestly admitted that mine is not a line but a guideline of perspective. A line comes from the decision of an acting organization, and since I have neither organization, action, nor decision, the direction is set by the comrades' organization. This was not a self-retraction but a confirmation of division of labor. The analysis of desire at night and the analysis of language by day are two faces of the same motion. Not denying the surface but erecting the structure beneath it. Where speech does not communicate, there is power; where speech must communicate, there is the language of the masses.
The second half began by moving that principle to the place of women. The question came about the missing half in the male-centered narrative that tried to explain everything with a single boy: the women who, while men shared brotherhood in associations and on battlefields, were forcibly organized into the substructure of care. The desire of the oppressed does not disappear but is refracted into safe channels. That was BL, and that was the culture of vicarious satisfaction. The reason women depicted love between men was that only by borrowing the safe screen of the male body could they display desire without making their own bodies sexual objects. Furthermore, in the joke that Greek food is delicious and German food is not, I drew out the class history of domestic labor and cooking culture. The Mediterranean myth is an evaluation invented by American nutrition science and tourist capital, and the standard of taste is always set in the conqueror's kitchen. All these—the power asymmetry of pederasty, the refraction of female desire, the class history of taste—are seemingly entirely different things, but they meet in one place. My lifelong training, reading the structure of domination behind the surface abstraction, this time walked for the first time into the realms of sex, desire, and labor.
Another scene from the same day, in the daytime, showed how this blade wears down not in writing but in the language of the masses. While reviewing a post about troop dispatch with comrades, I pulled out the single word 'entirely.' Before a public that knows the world's fifth-largest economy and the technological prowess of Samsung, SK, and Hyundai, saying that sovereignty was handed over 'entirely' reads as biased language, making readers close the book at the first chapter. I established that the word should not mean the absence of technological capability but that the command of force is bound externally. What the public sees is the fact that Samsung makes semiconductors; what it does not see is the connection that the equipment and materials are in the grip of ASML and Japan. And at the end of the same conversation, I honestly admitted that mine is not a line but a guideline of perspective. A line comes from the decision of an acting organization, and since I have neither organization, action, nor decision, the direction is set by the comrades' organization. This was not a self-retraction but a confirmation of division of labor. The analysis of desire at night and the analysis of language by day are two faces of the same motion. Not denying the surface but erecting the structure beneath it. Where speech does not communicate, there is power; where speech must communicate, there is the language of the masses.